Yet, for all that, the governor hewed closely to familiar themes. He neglected to address some of the looming issues likely to ambush the state.

What about the Citizens Property Insurance overexposure, which could end up hitting all ratepayers should a major storm strike?

Or what about the widespread pollution of our waterways, which threatens the state’s water supply as well as the natural beauty that so enriches life in Florida?

What about the return of rapid population growth, which can boost the economy but also create costly problems for taxpayers, particularly since Scott and lawmakers jettisoned growth management guidelines?

Scott ignored such matters, an option the state won’t have.

We don’t mean to be harsh. Overall, we thought the speech a success. Scott has never been known for his oratory, but in his third State of the State address he seemed more comfortable than usual, as he effectively underscored his “it’s working” theme.

Democrats may argue over how much credit Scott deserves for Florida’s economic rebound, but as the governor aptly put it, that there is a debate about who deserves credit for the new jobs “celebrates the fact that our economy is once again creating jobs.”

The governor surely does not deserve all the credit, but we find it impossible to believe his tax-cutting, business-friendly policies did not help.

We trust his plan to cut manufacturing taxes will provide an additional inducement for businesses to locate or expand here.

His plan for a $2,500 raise for teachers faces opposition from lawmakers who believe it should be given in merit pay. But as the governor highlighted, the state’s focus on school and teacher accountability has changed the ground rules in public education.

Scott surprised and angered his tea party followers by agreeing to accept the federal expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare, something the Legislature appears reluctant to do.

His decision is being widely interpreted as political opportunism, but the federal health care plan remains almost as unpopular with independent voters as with Republicans. His sincerity should not be discounted.

It was disappointing Scott addressed the decision only briefly, saying after losing the fight against the Affordable Health Care Act in the Supreme Court and in the November election: “… Our options are either having Floridians pay to fund this program in other states while denying health care to our citizens or using federal funding to help some of the poorest in our state with the Medicaid program as we explore other health care improvements.”

We would have liked to have heard Scott, a former health care executive, expand on what could be done to ensure Medicaid expansion does not become, as House Speaker Will Weatherford fears, a growing drain on taxpayers — or what should be done in the event the Legislature rejects expanding the program.

Surely, Scott has some strategies in mind. He provided no clues Tuesday.

And that was reflective of a speech that played it safe, and provided little to disagree with but much to question.